The High Court authorised the Adoption Authority of Ireland to make an adoption order for T. in favour of her foster carers, a married couple, and dispensed with the birth mother’s consent. The decision was made under section 54(2) of the Adoption Act 2010, as amended. The judgment does not itself record that an adoption order was made.
Mr Justice Jordan delivered the judgment on 12 April 2019. T. was approaching 18. The couple had cared for her since 2008, following earlier day fostering, and had been declared eligible and suitable to adopt. The Adoption Authority had also declared that it would make an adoption order if authorised by the court.
The judge described T.’s birth mother as having a mild learning difficulty and found that she had not been able to provide adequate care. The judgment recounts concerns about T.’s health and the mother’s response to medical advice, as well as repeated disruptions to contact visits. The judge said there was no intention by the mother to neglect or abandon T., but concluded that her continuing failure in parental duties amounted to abandonment of parental rights in the legal sense.
The court heard that T. strongly wanted to be adopted by her foster carers. At the parties’ suggestion and agreement, the judge spoke with her informally in a cleared courtroom, with the registrar present. He found she understood her situation and adoption, and gave due weight to her views in light of her age and maturity. The judgment also notes her ongoing relationship with a younger birth sister, whom she met regularly with support from both foster families.
The judge found that the mother had failed in her duty for at least 36 months to an extent likely to prejudice T.’s safety or welfare, and that there was no reasonable prospect she could care for T. without that risk. He also found that T. had been in the couple’s custody and home for at least 18 months before the application, and that adoption was a proportionate means of supplying the place of her parents. He said T.’s best interests were the paramount consideration.
Although the court considered it desirable to hear a birth parent’s evidence before making an order under section 54, the judge found it fit and proper to proceed without the mother’s evidence in the circumstances. He also considered an argument referring to the European Convention on Human Rights Act 2003 and the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, which had not been pressed at the hearing, and found no breach of the mother’s rights under the UN convention.